Comments on: Ask Ray | Your recent book mentioned cuteness and made me wonderhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder
Accelerating IntelligenceMon, 03 Aug 2015 00:13:20 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1By: anonhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-215002
anonThu, 26 Sep 2013 07:15:00 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-215002Commercials have always had the cutest people one can find. You become desensitized to it. If the people aren't incredibly cute, the product sold can't be that good. Apparently people don't want to buy things that less cute people sell. Why? Also, the standards of cute remain very narrow.Commercials have always had the cutest people one can find. You become desensitized to it. If the people aren’t incredibly cute, the product sold can’t be that good. Apparently people don’t want to buy things that less cute people sell. Why? Also, the standards of cute remain very narrow.
]]>By: Brihttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-210047
BriMon, 23 Sep 2013 03:33:16 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-210047It would probably be wise to focus on empathy, in terms of AGI.It would probably be wise to focus on empathy, in terms of AGI.
]]>By: Brihttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-208097
BriSun, 22 Sep 2013 14:59:47 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-208097Nobody seems to want to talk about the mechanistic aspects of things like cuteness, bonding, or love. That we feel these emotions is unquestionable. They form the memories that we cherish. It is these emotions that drive our desires for life. They are all in association with evolution, and the further developement of life. They are functional and contrived to increase the odds of survival.
Rest assure that baby mole rats are cute to their parents. With a little wiring changes to us humans, we would find them as irresistible as Mr. Brin finds his children. As we become the architects of our destiny, we will have choices like this available.
One of the defining attributes of sociopathy is a lack of empathy. These individuals have trouble connecting to other people. They can't form emotional bonds to others. It would be possible to correct this defect. Make them so emotionally attached, that it would be impossible for them to harm others. Like in the movie Seven Years in Tibet, where the monks couldn't dig the foundation for the theater, because they would be killing worms.
This also applies to AI. Ray talks about them being an extension of humanity. Why wouldn't we incorporate Tge forces of evolution into tgem. Why wouldn't we make them find naked mole rats, absolutely adorable, and the rest of life on earth. The bonding and attachment is to serve evolution. To increase lifes survivability.
We understand that we are creating another life form in AI. As it's creators wouldn't we want to follow the same trajectory that evolution has already taken. Wouldn't AGI be able to perceive that it's is a product of biological evolution, and that life is the goal, and that it should be preserved? If anything, the concept of cuteness should be applied to other aspects of our interactions. To some extent we should all strive to find naked mole rats more adorable. Put in other words, we should all try to find peace love and understanding. We should be focusing on our interdependence and "fostering" better empathy for others. Not on taking advantage of others, which seems to be the credo of so many. As I've alluded to before. Morals don't desend from religion. Morals desend from logic and reason. Society has evolved morals as another form of bonding, that increases Tge odds that humanity will survive.Nobody seems to want to talk about the mechanistic aspects of things like cuteness, bonding, or love. That we feel these emotions is unquestionable. They form the memories that we cherish. It is these emotions that drive our desires for life. They are all in association with evolution, and the further developement of life. They are functional and contrived to increase the odds of survival.

Rest assure that baby mole rats are cute to their parents. With a little wiring changes to us humans, we would find them as irresistible as Mr. Brin finds his children. As we become the architects of our destiny, we will have choices like this available.

One of the defining attributes of sociopathy is a lack of empathy. These individuals have trouble connecting to other people. They can’t form emotional bonds to others. It would be possible to correct this defect. Make them so emotionally attached, that it would be impossible for them to harm others. Like in the movie Seven Years in Tibet, where the monks couldn’t dig the foundation for the theater, because they would be killing worms.

This also applies to AI. Ray talks about them being an extension of humanity. Why wouldn’t we incorporate Tge forces of evolution into tgem. Why wouldn’t we make them find naked mole rats, absolutely adorable, and the rest of life on earth. The bonding and attachment is to serve evolution. To increase lifes survivability.

We understand that we are creating another life form in AI. As it’s creators wouldn’t we want to follow the same trajectory that evolution has already taken. Wouldn’t AGI be able to perceive that it’s is a product of biological evolution, and that life is the goal, and that it should be preserved? If anything, the concept of cuteness should be applied to other aspects of our interactions. To some extent we should all strive to find naked mole rats more adorable. Put in other words, we should all try to find peace love and understanding. We should be focusing on our interdependence and “fostering” better empathy for others. Not on taking advantage of others, which seems to be the credo of so many. As I’ve alluded to before. Morals don’t desend from religion. Morals desend from logic and reason. Society has evolved morals as another form of bonding, that increases Tge odds that humanity will survive.

]]>By: Trance_Enderhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-205780
Trance_EnderSat, 21 Sep 2013 22:15:19 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-205780There is a meme, "so ugly it is cute", which notably applies to classic English bulldogs and, one might say, naked mole rats.There is a meme, “so ugly it is cute”, which notably applies to classic English bulldogs and, one might say, naked mole rats.
]]>By: DKhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-205297
DKSat, 21 Sep 2013 18:38:38 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-205297You couldn't be any more wrong. Evolution doesn't "select" anyone, perhaps your disconnected from the reality we are over-populating our planet and not by small numbers, how many babies are born in the world every 24hrs? Now take that number into how many babies are born into parents that can support them, feed them, educate, etc... I'm asking you to realize the numbers yourself. You say "condition", baby cuteness is more of a precondition left over from centuries previous, I'd say it's more like the baby/human plague.You couldn’t be any more wrong. Evolution doesn’t “select” anyone, perhaps your disconnected from the reality we are over-populating our planet and not by small numbers, how many babies are born in the world every 24hrs? Now take that number into how many babies are born into parents that can support them, feed them, educate, etc… I’m asking you to realize the numbers yourself. You say “condition”, baby cuteness is more of a precondition left over from centuries previous, I’d say it’s more like the baby/human plague.
]]>By: Brihttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-203104
BriSat, 21 Sep 2013 01:22:58 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-203104Any words of wisdom on the fate of these traits, as we approach the Singularity?Any words of wisdom on the fate of these traits, as we approach the Singularity?
]]>By: David Brinhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-202832
David BrinFri, 20 Sep 2013 23:50:41 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-202832Ever had a three-year-old? They take control of you via cuteness! We are ALL descended from the ones that were too cute to strangle... ;-)
With cordial regards,
David Brin
http://www.davidbrin.com
blog: http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/
twitter: https://twitter.com/DavidBrinEver had a three-year-old? They take control of you via cuteness! We are ALL descended from the ones that were too cute to strangle… ;-)

]]>By: marracohttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-199554
marracoWed, 18 Sep 2013 05:06:30 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-199554Evolution is tolerant to fails.
Our DNA cannot assume that our body is of a given size, because it would stop evolution. A randomly generated larger body need the rest of DNA to adapt to it. So our bodies are not finely tunned to our particular needs but to generic and general needs.
Otherwise, we would not find cute some of our mutant childs.
We would not be here if some monkeys didn't found humans cute. We exist because we find cute to be a loosely defined concept, and that's why we find cute most mammals.Evolution is tolerant to fails.

Our DNA cannot assume that our body is of a given size, because it would stop evolution. A randomly generated larger body need the rest of DNA to adapt to it. So our bodies are not finely tunned to our particular needs but to generic and general needs.
Otherwise, we would not find cute some of our mutant childs.

We would not be here if some monkeys didn’t found humans cute. We exist because we find cute to be a loosely defined concept, and that’s why we find cute most mammals.

]]>By: mehttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-199552
meWed, 18 Sep 2013 04:57:28 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-199552Newborns are generally not cute to me. But they turn cute as they grow.Newborns are generally not cute to me. But they turn cute as they grow.
]]>By: Gorden Russellhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-199338
Gorden RussellTue, 17 Sep 2013 22:56:03 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-199338I was a baby photographer for a couple of years and saw thousands. In all that time, only one baby wasn't cute. The poor thing had been pulled out by forceps and was as pinheaded as Dan Akroyd in his old SNL skit. But even that went away in time.
If you don't find babies cute, evolution just may select to keep you out of the gene pool.
But maybe you're just very young. In time you could grow out of this condition.I was a baby photographer for a couple of years and saw thousands. In all that time, only one baby wasn’t cute. The poor thing had been pulled out by forceps and was as pinheaded as Dan Akroyd in his old SNL skit. But even that went away in time.

If you don’t find babies cute, evolution just may select to keep you out of the gene pool.

But maybe you’re just very young. In time you could grow out of this condition.

]]>By: Derek New Orleanshttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-198781
Derek New OrleansTue, 17 Sep 2013 03:20:50 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-198781Maybe Im weird here but I wouldnt put baby humans at the top of my cuteness list. In fact I think some babies are kind of ugly lol...Maybe Im weird here but I wouldnt put baby humans at the top of my cuteness list. In fact I think some babies are kind of ugly lol…
]]>By: Gorden Russellhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-198752
Gorden RussellTue, 17 Sep 2013 00:34:03 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-198752Well, Mr. X, maggots are revolting for a reason. We have instincts to make us avoid things that are unhealthy.
Those who don't avoid the unhealthy, take sick and die, removing themselves from the gene pool.
Those who cling to healthy habits live longer and leave more offspring.
So in time, all the survivors are revolted by maggots (unless they are drawn by a cartoon artist who gives them big eyes and button noses).Well, Mr. X, maggots are revolting for a reason. We have instincts to make us avoid things that are unhealthy.

Those who don’t avoid the unhealthy, take sick and die, removing themselves from the gene pool.

Those who cling to healthy habits live longer and leave more offspring.

So in time, all the survivors are revolted by maggots (unless they are drawn by a cartoon artist who gives them big eyes and button noses).

]]>By: Gorden Russellhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-198722
Gorden RussellMon, 16 Sep 2013 22:46:05 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-198722So, Ancient one, is your real name...Cthulhu?So, Ancient one, is your real name…Cthulhu?
]]>By: GatorALLinhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-198577
GatorALLinMon, 16 Sep 2013 21:20:20 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-198577----You bring up a good point that just being vulnerable is not enough to illicit the cute response... Of course most soft and vulnerable insects that can't bite or hurt us would still miss the mark for cute by a mile. However, I still get tasked with taking out a daddy longlegs outside to rescue it from being in the house.—-You bring up a good point that just being vulnerable is not enough to illicit the cute response… Of course most soft and vulnerable insects that can’t bite or hurt us would still miss the mark for cute by a mile. However, I still get tasked with taking out a daddy longlegs outside to rescue it from being in the house.
]]>By: Steve Khttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-198372
Steve KMon, 16 Sep 2013 15:40:14 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-198372See Stephen Jay Gould where he remarked on this phenomenon in an article for the journal Natural History. In the article he pointed out that over time Mickey Mouse had been drawn more and more to resemble an infant—with a bigger head, bigger eyes, and so forth. Gould suggested that this change in Mickey's image was intended to increase his popularity by making him appear cuter.See Stephen Jay Gould where he remarked on this phenomenon in an article for the journal Natural History. In the article he pointed out that over time Mickey Mouse had been drawn more and more to resemble an infant—with a bigger head, bigger eyes, and so forth. Gould suggested that this change in Mickey’s image was intended to increase his popularity by making him appear cuter.
]]>By: Phil Osbornhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-198084
Phil OsbornSun, 15 Sep 2013 23:35:18 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-198084http://philosborn.joeuser.com/article/301081
The take I have on "cuteness," as well as related concepts, such as ugliness, beauty, etc., is that these are evolved mechanisms to reduce processing overhead.
Imagine an animal who is supposed to signal another animal when something special occurs - food is discovered, a predator in the vicinity, etc. Crows, for example, have developed very precise signalling for these kinds of purposes. If crows did not have a uniform vocabulary for this signalling, no doubt learned early on in youth, then the signalling would consist of "something! something!" instead of "cat approaching from the north."
On a more general focus, the purpose of consciousness, in terms of its life function, is to make us aware of things of significance, against a field of largely chaos and disorder. We derive cognitive leverage from having a sensory processing system that is tuned to sift through the chaos and see the patterns that reflect inherent regularities in the environment. We don't NEED to see everything, and we could not do so anyway, so the crucial thing is to see what is important.
Art is based on this same principle - the selective focus and display of essentials. We build homes and shopping centers with the idea of a kind of artistic beauty of form and function that goes way beyond the simple needs of shelter and physical space.
In that context, it is only normal to expect that the value of a kind of Platonic Ideal should emerge via selection. In general, we are pattern finders. It would be odd that a creature/system whose every action was based on pattern recognition would lack a very strong sensory patterning in its own structure - especially so for a creature so dependent upon interactions with its fellows as a human.
If we encountered an alien - e.g., Rand's intelligent spider from mars - we would have to completely retrain our ability to empathise based on facial signals and body language. It probably would take a while, but not forever, so long as there was some clue completing the learning loop. I acquired an Amazon parrot some decades ago, and within days I could read the parrot's facial expression. It vastly helped that the parrot had been raised by other humans, so it could mirror and feed back my own facial expressions as it read them.
In fact, after a few months of living together, my parrot decided - failing other options - that I was to be his or her mate - and presented me with regurgitated food balls. (It remained a Platonic relationship, BTW, altho if you have arthritus in the finger joints, some parrots can give the most amazing finger joint massages, going into every little crack and crevice, quite systematically.)
Cuteness is just another example of how our mind wants to reduce overhead due to noise and chaos and focus on the important. In some alternate reality, it may not matter that a baby has big eyes, properly positioned like other babies and chubby cheeks, or that women's behinds or mammaries somehow fit some ideal mold. In fact, much of that may be overkill, just an artifact of more general processing. Typically, juveniles and young men fixate on these secondary sexual characteristics, while older men, who have learned the more precise and sophisticated methods of empathic pattern recognition, focus on signs of good character.http://philosborn.joeuser.com/article/301081

The take I have on “cuteness,” as well as related concepts, such as ugliness, beauty, etc., is that these are evolved mechanisms to reduce processing overhead.

Imagine an animal who is supposed to signal another animal when something special occurs – food is discovered, a predator in the vicinity, etc. Crows, for example, have developed very precise signalling for these kinds of purposes. If crows did not have a uniform vocabulary for this signalling, no doubt learned early on in youth, then the signalling would consist of “something! something!” instead of “cat approaching from the north.”

On a more general focus, the purpose of consciousness, in terms of its life function, is to make us aware of things of significance, against a field of largely chaos and disorder. We derive cognitive leverage from having a sensory processing system that is tuned to sift through the chaos and see the patterns that reflect inherent regularities in the environment. We don’t NEED to see everything, and we could not do so anyway, so the crucial thing is to see what is important.

Art is based on this same principle – the selective focus and display of essentials. We build homes and shopping centers with the idea of a kind of artistic beauty of form and function that goes way beyond the simple needs of shelter and physical space.

In that context, it is only normal to expect that the value of a kind of Platonic Ideal should emerge via selection. In general, we are pattern finders. It would be odd that a creature/system whose every action was based on pattern recognition would lack a very strong sensory patterning in its own structure – especially so for a creature so dependent upon interactions with its fellows as a human.

If we encountered an alien – e.g., Rand’s intelligent spider from mars – we would have to completely retrain our ability to empathise based on facial signals and body language. It probably would take a while, but not forever, so long as there was some clue completing the learning loop. I acquired an Amazon parrot some decades ago, and within days I could read the parrot’s facial expression. It vastly helped that the parrot had been raised by other humans, so it could mirror and feed back my own facial expressions as it read them.

In fact, after a few months of living together, my parrot decided – failing other options – that I was to be his or her mate – and presented me with regurgitated food balls. (It remained a Platonic relationship, BTW, altho if you have arthritus in the finger joints, some parrots can give the most amazing finger joint massages, going into every little crack and crevice, quite systematically.)

Cuteness is just another example of how our mind wants to reduce overhead due to noise and chaos and focus on the important. In some alternate reality, it may not matter that a baby has big eyes, properly positioned like other babies and chubby cheeks, or that women’s behinds or mammaries somehow fit some ideal mold. In fact, much of that may be overkill, just an artifact of more general processing. Typically, juveniles and young men fixate on these secondary sexual characteristics, while older men, who have learned the more precise and sophisticated methods of empathic pattern recognition, focus on signs of good character.

]]>By: Ancient onehttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-197953
Ancient oneSun, 15 Sep 2013 15:29:37 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-197953I always thought that human babies looked like naked mole rats!I always thought that human babies looked like naked mole rats!
]]>By: Brihttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-197945
BriSun, 15 Sep 2013 14:35:56 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-197945The primordial animals layed eggs and left them to fend for themselves. Mammals developed nurturing behaviors because Thet increased survival. Many egg laying creatures will let their offspring hang around, or even hang onto their parents. The instincts to nurture probable originated about that time. It is evolved derivations of these bonding instincts that have made society evolve.
There is no doubt that baby faces are perceived as cute and lovable, and that this has an effect on what we consider attractive. Leonardo Di Caprio' face is a classic " baby" face, but how much we are affected and why becomes a much more complex issue. Much of that response is from the behavior of what we're perceiving as cute. Horror films have a lot of fun with that.
The reason I'm alluding to an expansion of tees ideas is that much of our behavior is directly derived instinctual urges. Their contex is with a mammalian world. The way things physically move derives behavior from us. What happens when we are more in silico? Sure we will learn how to orchestrate the brain chemicals to derive the same responses, but doesn't that dilute it's original effects? I know that question sounds ambiguous, but it's best asked in an example.
Let's use pair bonding as the example. It's a derived mammalian survival instinct. Almost exclusively for the creation of cute little babies. The two subjects are in their prime. They are both extremely attractive to each other. They may or may not bond, dependent on a very complex courtship dance, were by each partner proves their fidelity and cappabilities. This ultimately is the main chapter in human mammalian life. It's Tge foundation of many movies and stories because it is so instinctually attractive.
When we're all uploaded, how does that dynamic tension still exist? If you want to have a relationship with Maralyn Monroe, poof it's done you go off and have lots of kids and it's done right? Our world of relationships is a dynamic interaction. A tension of potentials. A study on successful monogamous relationships that happened in Britain a number of years back revealed this hidden world of primal instincts.
They wanted to know whatade for successful relationships so tgey studied them. They also examined the blood for hormones. To their surprise tgey found that as soon as the couples were apart, their esx hormones went up through the roof. This isn't a fluke. This happens to allot us. If you become sensitive to body language and behavior, you see it everywhere. We are constantly presenting ourselves for ranking in our society and it's reproductive ramifications. The couples became sexually responsive because it increases their chances of passing down their genes. So how is this supposed to work in a computer? Our behavior is derived from our bodies. Cute is a response designed to illicit a behavior out of us.
Ray has spoken about a famous operation where while doing brain surgery, a region of the brain was stimulated and the patient started to laugh and found everything funny. If someone were being hacked to pieces and this area is stimulated you will find it to be uncontrollably funny. The same type thing is happening for cuteness. Certain shales and actions cause a instinctual response, which means it connects the appropriate brain centers for the bonding, attraction, nurturing behaviors
So in a computer program you coukd find naked mole rats irresistibly attractive. Everythings contextual meaning can be twisted into any combination. It happens enough here on the earthly plane.
When Muslum women dress in black from head to toe, the men become sensitized to the feet and eyes. Right now there is intense evolutionary pressure for the evolution of the prettiest feet. That's how this evolutionary dynamic system works. Look at the dances and plumage on the birds of paradise. In a few million years Muslum women would have some unbelievable feet. How's that going to work in a computer program?
I kinda like my MOSH brains. I'm a little Leary of being an android. Sure I can neurologically connect it so I think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, but is that what I truly want? It all seems to be a matter of perspective. A matter of context. Will AGI find naked mole rats cute? Why not?The primordial animals layed eggs and left them to fend for themselves. Mammals developed nurturing behaviors because Thet increased survival. Many egg laying creatures will let their offspring hang around, or even hang onto their parents. The instincts to nurture probable originated about that time. It is evolved derivations of these bonding instincts that have made society evolve.

There is no doubt that baby faces are perceived as cute and lovable, and that this has an effect on what we consider attractive. Leonardo Di Caprio’ face is a classic ” baby” face, but how much we are affected and why becomes a much more complex issue. Much of that response is from the behavior of what we’re perceiving as cute. Horror films have a lot of fun with that.

The reason I’m alluding to an expansion of tees ideas is that much of our behavior is directly derived instinctual urges. Their contex is with a mammalian world. The way things physically move derives behavior from us. What happens when we are more in silico? Sure we will learn how to orchestrate the brain chemicals to derive the same responses, but doesn’t that dilute it’s original effects? I know that question sounds ambiguous, but it’s best asked in an example.

Let’s use pair bonding as the example. It’s a derived mammalian survival instinct. Almost exclusively for the creation of cute little babies. The two subjects are in their prime. They are both extremely attractive to each other. They may or may not bond, dependent on a very complex courtship dance, were by each partner proves their fidelity and cappabilities. This ultimately is the main chapter in human mammalian life. It’s Tge foundation of many movies and stories because it is so instinctually attractive.

When we’re all uploaded, how does that dynamic tension still exist? If you want to have a relationship with Maralyn Monroe, poof it’s done you go off and have lots of kids and it’s done right? Our world of relationships is a dynamic interaction. A tension of potentials. A study on successful monogamous relationships that happened in Britain a number of years back revealed this hidden world of primal instincts.

They wanted to know whatade for successful relationships so tgey studied them. They also examined the blood for hormones. To their surprise tgey found that as soon as the couples were apart, their esx hormones went up through the roof. This isn’t a fluke. This happens to allot us. If you become sensitive to body language and behavior, you see it everywhere. We are constantly presenting ourselves for ranking in our society and it’s reproductive ramifications. The couples became sexually responsive because it increases their chances of passing down their genes. So how is this supposed to work in a computer? Our behavior is derived from our bodies. Cute is a response designed to illicit a behavior out of us.

Ray has spoken about a famous operation where while doing brain surgery, a region of the brain was stimulated and the patient started to laugh and found everything funny. If someone were being hacked to pieces and this area is stimulated you will find it to be uncontrollably funny. The same type thing is happening for cuteness. Certain shales and actions cause a instinctual response, which means it connects the appropriate brain centers for the bonding, attraction, nurturing behaviors

So in a computer program you coukd find naked mole rats irresistibly attractive. Everythings contextual meaning can be twisted into any combination. It happens enough here on the earthly plane.

When Muslum women dress in black from head to toe, the men become sensitized to the feet and eyes. Right now there is intense evolutionary pressure for the evolution of the prettiest feet. That’s how this evolutionary dynamic system works. Look at the dances and plumage on the birds of paradise. In a few million years Muslum women would have some unbelievable feet. How’s that going to work in a computer program?

I kinda like my MOSH brains. I’m a little Leary of being an android. Sure I can neurologically connect it so I think it’s the greatest thing since sliced bread, but is that what I truly want? It all seems to be a matter of perspective. A matter of context. Will AGI find naked mole rats cute? Why not?

]]>By: Mr.Xhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-197937
Mr.XSun, 15 Sep 2013 13:23:45 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-197937@GatorAllin:
"seems like anything that is vulnerable OR cute must create some instinct for us humans to care for it"
Like maggots?
"I am sure there is some large eye ratio or other factors that trigger this gut reaction we all share some of."
Hm, but really... vulnerable and puny poultry seem to trigger a "gut reaction" in most people (the McChicken is based on that), so there must be something to your hypothesis.
I am sure all this is due to our evolutionary heritage (lots of which we share with other manmals -damned Freudian slip (cloth.) ).@GatorAllin:
“seems like anything that is vulnerable OR cute must create some instinct for us humans to care for it”

Like maggots?

“I am sure there is some large eye ratio or other factors that trigger this gut reaction we all share some of.”

Hm, but really… vulnerable and puny poultry seem to trigger a “gut reaction” in most people (the McChicken is based on that), so there must be something to your hypothesis.

I am sure all this is due to our evolutionary heritage (lots of which we share with other manmals -damned Freudian slip (cloth.) ).

]]>By: GatorALLinhttp://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-your-recent-book-mentioned-cuteness-and-made-me-wonder/comment-page-1#comment-197730
GatorALLinSun, 15 Sep 2013 03:31:00 +0000http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=207022#comment-197730... seems like anything that is vulnerable or cute must create some instinct for us humans to care for it, mother it or protect it. I am sure there is some large eye ratio or other factors that trigger this gut reaction we all share some of.
...had me actually thinking of the pictures I found of the Polar bear that was hungry, but did not eat the sled dogs that were chained up and could not escape... rather the dogs went into a play stance and may have triggered some play instinct in the Polar bear to override the kill or eat instinct... ? Not sure if there are other details on the Polar bear story that are worth discussing here, but had to toss this into the idea pile http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bcl0yrHPwk… seems like anything that is vulnerable or cute must create some instinct for us humans to care for it, mother it or protect it. I am sure there is some large eye ratio or other factors that trigger this gut reaction we all share some of.

…had me actually thinking of the pictures I found of the Polar bear that was hungry, but did not eat the sled dogs that were chained up and could not escape… rather the dogs went into a play stance and may have triggered some play instinct in the Polar bear to override the kill or eat instinct… ? Not sure if there are other details on the Polar bear story that are worth discussing here, but had to toss this into the idea pile http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bcl0yrHPwk